The Wilmingtonian., 1887-04-16

have been very uniav0rably impressed
against us because of being too lax, and ton
indefinite, not in on. principles or articles Of
religion, but in our llturgical worship. You
know how it has been in many of our
churches throughout the country In a
number of our churches large portion OF
our beautiful worship has been entirely
omitted. Some Of our ministers, am told,
have been in the h lbit of beginning NOM
ing prayer, and frequently the evening
prayer, with the Psalter. In that case the
| opening sentences, the exhOrtation, the gen.
eral confession, the Lords prayer, these
necessary and stirring portions of our grand
service, are omitted. There are those, too,
who seldom read the Litany, because in their
JUDGMENT it makes the service too lengthy
and wcaries the congregation. There have
been others in our church who were in the
habit Of making mp service to suit their
owo tastes fom different portions of our
LITURGY. What right has any one to abuse
the liberty which is given to our ministers,
Title 1, Canon 10, of the use of the prayer
book distinctly says, "On occasions uf pub.
lis worship, invariably on the morning Of
the Lur Is day. commonly called Sunday,
and at other tunes at The discretion of the
minister, the p aver bouk set forth at any
| time by the general council Is to be used III
the cong eEatiOns Of this church; resolved,
that nothing in this canon is to be uuder-
sto' d as precluding extempore prayer before
! nj
This u the law Of our church. aud eleve
it ought to be strictly enforced. We make
serious mistake in admitting ministers
from ether ohurches into our ministry with
| out sui citing them to II rigid exam nation
in what is required OF them in the praye j.,
book We expect them to be sound in doe
trine, hut very much unsettled in the use of
our beautiful services. l trust you will
take it in the proper spirit in the liberty
sake to ieier to another subject of imp ,rt-
auce. have reference to the wearing of
the surplce by the most of our brol her
miaisters in ths West, nnder Bshop CHARLES
Edward Cheney. | believe that the sur
plce was never a matter of dispute years
ag in the Protestant Episcopal Church. And
those who wanted a revision of the pray Ser
book, did not want, as have been in.
formed, to give up the sur. lice. We have
had no legislation upon the matter in our
church. There is nothing said, so far an
know, in our canon law for or against either
the surpllce or gown. This is a matter that
ought to be settled
an Mi 10 h,y l..
derived from the longer aud more flowing
vostment which in the Roman Catholic
Church is still used in the mass, and il
called the ''alb," but in that church the
surplice is worn not alone by the priests
but by the young a pirants for holy order,
In the popular mind the surplce is associa-
ted with the Roman priesthood, but it is
difficult to say on what argument this notion
rests. There is No church more evlugs lca
and more free from the germs of Romauism
than the Moravlan Church, aud yet the
ministers of that chuich IN the admiuih htra-
tion OF the holy communion wear the
surp.ice. Even il it has been derived from
ths Roman Cath lie Cgureh, and as it il
vOIn by some Of Our ministers, | cannot see
how it can have p,ies IL significance The
prayer book came to Us from the r IN au
church, but since it has been purLed o ( its
errors, 1t is perfectly consistent with our
evangelical creed. | cannot see how the
'nrplce eau have any Roman Significance.
We b ave no priests, no altar aud no sacri
fee to offer. 1 am willing to submit the
matter to the General Council, and whatever
disposition be made Of it by the vote of our
clergy and laity will meet with the favor I
our entire church. / am not prepared To
say who is right or wrong on the wearing
If the surplice, but l do thiuk in this mat
Ter Of vestments, as We'll as church wor-
ship, there ought to be uniformity"